And the new MS console is going to be backwards compatible? Since when? I haven't heard about that yet. You're talking like it's practically official. Got some insider information?

To be fair, the odds of the new Xbox being backwards compatible are fairly high. I don't think any specific information about this has leaked yet, but unlike the PS3 vs PS4, the old Xbox is similar enough to the new architecture that backwards compatibility should be possible. Now it might turn out that Microsoft isn't interested in devoting the resources to making this work, but I think they will, if nothing else because they will have known for quite a while that this isn't something Sony would be able to do.

Considering the last two Playstations had backwards compatibility, and Sony had gone on the record as saying BC would continue forever, it's almost something that was expected. They had years to figure out how to do BC right, and failed.

Why wouldn't Microsoft offer BC with the next Xbox? Through their emulation on the 360, they had to basically hand code every game to be compatible with it.. that took a lot of time and effort. When MS thought that "nobody cared about BC" and got the back lash they did over it, they pumped out even more BC. Like Sony, MS has had years to figure out how to get BC right this time as well. While there's nothing official yet, I do remember reading a leaked document somewhere that MS felt 20% of their user base were interested in BC and it's something they'd need to serious look at.

That would leave Sony as the only console this generation as not supporting the last.

Quote from: Canuck on February 28, 2013, 08:21:52 AM

Quote from: corruptrelic on February 28, 2013, 12:43:40 AM

No support for CDs?

Finding it hard to justify paying $60+ on any PS3 game these days knowing it won't be compatible come next generation. As soon as MS announce the Nextbox being BC, I think I'll start investing more money in my 360 that's been collecting dust for months.

CD's? Come on. Sony has given lots of reasons to criticize. Pick something decent. And the new MS console is going to be backwards compatible? Since when? I haven't heard about that yet. You're talking like it's practically official. Got some insider information?

Logged

"A gladiator does not fear death. He embraces it. Caresses it. Fucks it. Every time he enters the arena, he slides his cock into the mouth of the beast."

Considering the last two Playstations had backwards compatibility, and Sony had gone on the record as saying BC would continue forever, it's almost something that was expected. They had years to figure out how to do BC right, and failed.

Well, if you feel like wasting your time, feel free to talk about this forever. You are ignoring the reality of console hardware however, and completely ignoring what I said in my last post. I'm not telling "what's decent to criticize Sony about". I'm telling you the facts. The reason this discussion is pointless is that you have essentially only three options:

1) Sony creates the PS4 with a new generation of the Cell processor, leaving developers frustrated at having to deal with its eccentricities and eventually driving most of them away. All this for one single reason: Backwards compatibility with the PS3. Essentially, Sony would commit commercial suicide just so you can play PS3 games on an expensive new box, games you can play on the PS3 anyway. 2) Sony ditches the Cell processor to make a system that is both cheaper to make and easier to develop for, removing any advantage Microsoft has had in the last generation in this regard. In fact, Sony takes it one step further by allowing developers to dig deeper into the hardware if they so desire, something that Microsoft supposedly refuses to let its developers do. The consequence of this option is that any backwards compatibility would have to be done through software since the hardware is completely incompatible. Software emulation is incredibly taxing on the CPU, and would be incredibly expensive to develop. For all practical purposes the PS4 won't be powerful enough to do software emulation of PS3 games anyway. This is the option Sony went with, though they decided to sweeten the deal by opening the door to streaming backwards compatibility, which is the best backup solution they could have thought of, and also the reason why this option was easy to predict before the presentation (just look earlier in this thread where I predicted this long before the PS4 was actually announced). 3) Sony creates a console modeled on option 2 above, but with a Cell processor included for backwards compatibility only. The best of both worlds! You get both the easy development for PS4 games and full backwards compatibility. What could possibly be problematic with this? Well, the fact that the Cell processor is damned expensive, for one, and there'd be all kinds of problems getting all of this to work together. The result is a console that is at least as expensive as the PS3 was at launch, essentially handing Microsoft the keys to next-gen victory on a silver plate.

These are the ONLY options you have. Are you willing to pay extra for backwards compatibility and doom the Playstation brand in the process? Fine, but know that you're in the vast minority. You've still got the PS3, and you'll have streaming backwards compatibility (most likely). Deal with it! We're not living in fantasy land where you can have your cake and eat it too. Sony fucked up with the direction they took the PS3, and they have to pay the price for it now, either by changing the fundamentals of their console design or by giving up the console war. They chose the former.

So if you want to criticize Sony, criticize them for the PS3 and its design. They deserve that. For the PS4 they took the criticism to heart and chose the only sensible option. Seeing the ignorance being spouted around by people who feel that Sony is betraying them by not including PS3 compatibility out of the box is frankly annoying the hell out of me. They had no real choice. There is nothing to discuss here. This isn't me deciding what you can or can't criticize. This is reality.

I think the reason backwards compatibility goes away is because the people who really want it are not really their primary demographic. Even if there are a lot of you, and there probably are, you have pretty much admitted the fact that you mostly buy/play games much later in their life cycles. If you are not going to buy the latest and greatest on release day at $60 a piece there is little incentive for them to try and keep you happy.

I buy the latest and greatest games all the time. Weekly, for the most part. I spend too much on this hobby.

I will likely not be buying the latest and greatest on the PS4 until this Streaming BC happens (and happens in a reasonable fashion where it's clear that I'm not being gouged to buy my games again) because I won't have a PS4 until that time. Which means I'll be getting launch games used. So they've lost me as a revenue stream at the beginning, at least.

Quote from: TiLT on February 28, 2013, 12:09:33 PM

Sony fucked up with the direction they took the PS3, and they have to pay the price for it now, either by changing the fundamentals of their console design or by giving up the console war. They chose the former.

No one is arguing about the fuck up being with the PS3. And part of the price they have to pay is dealing with customer complaints and loss. So we are complaining and not buying the console right away. You deal with it.

No idea why we're even talking about BC. Sony tried to give us a hardware solution last time around and it almost killed them. If everyone was so keen on BC then they should have gone out and bought the $600 console. It's not coming in hardware form so let's just get over it. Buy the console or don't buy the console - there's no sense in whinging about it.

No idea why we're even talking about BC. Sony tried to give us a hardware solution last time around and it almost killed them. If everyone was so keen on BC then they should have gone out and bought the $600 console. It's not coming in hardware form so let's just get over it. Buy the console or don't buy the console - there's no sense in whinging about it.

The reason we're talking about it is mentioned in numerous comments all through this thread. A number of people are unhappy that there will be no BC in the PS4. Many of us did go out and buy the expensive BC console, and two of us on this very thread have talked about having it die on us, with no opportunity to replace it and keep BC.

This thread is about the new console. The discussion will be about things people like about it and things people don't. It will also be about whether we're going to buy it or not buy it. Read the comments or don't - there's no sense in whinging* about it.

MS hasn't even released specs on thier latest and greatest and it feels like the Console Wars of the last generation is already kicking off on these forums.

It's not a console war when the only console being talked about is the PS4. It's a little hard to compare it to the Durango when we know so little of it yet.

Quote from: Turtle on February 28, 2013, 05:07:35 PM

But I suspect this coming generation of console wars is going to be a bit sillier since both consoles are going to have very similar hardware specs.

Yeah, unless Microsoft do any major fuckups with their April presentation, this generation will be closer than the last one in terms of cross-platform titles, if nothing else. It'll probably be the extras that become the determiner this time around. The PS4 has the Share button and the cool stuff it can do (I truly believe that the video recording feature will be a game changer), and the Durango will probably have something entirely different, but also focused on social functionality. I have a sneaking suspicion that Microsoft may do a last-minute upgrade to their RAM to match the PS4 in speed, like Sony did for the amount of RAM. If that happens, the differences in hardware will be so small that it won't matter. If they don't, the PS4 will have the hardware edge. Whether or not that matters is too early to tell.

I'm invested in the MS ecosystem far more than Sony's. That isn't to say I won't criticize MS for their faults, but Sony's repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot last launch doesn't instill confidence. I feel that fact, more than the inclusion of the emotion engine in the PS3 60GB, is what caused a halting start. It didn't help being soundly trounced (alongside MS) by Nintendo in hardware sales, where 360 at least had a year to establish itself, meant that PS3 was always behind in the race.

I just hope that they keep a clean interface - in some ways, I really do like the XMB, though I wish it was customizable.

As for MS's Durango - please PLEASE please PLEASE change the Pseudo-Metro interface into a real interface. You know, like actually being able to customize which tiles I want shown on each tab? Sure, lock an advertising tile on each page. I don't care. Just FIX IT. Ass-hats.

Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson

where 360 at least had a year to establish itself, meant that PS3 was always behind in the race.

It did catch up eventually though. The PS3 lifetime sales are higher than the ones for the 360.

Tilt I'm starting to think you are a high ranking officer in the SDF

It wouldn't surprise me, though, since XBOX sells horribly in Japan.

You also need to consider that the Playstation brand is a lot stronger in Europe than in the US too. Sure, the 360 has been more popular than the PS3 in the US, which sort of colors the conversations we can have about it in this place. On the other hand, the PS3 is more popular than the 360 in Europe. The last real numbers I saw were the Norwegian ones, where the game distributors (I think we only have one or two) revealed that the sales numbers for PS3 games were quite a lot higher than for the 360, by almost 20 percentiles of the total market.

I know you guys recently tend to brand me as a Sony fanboy (which is a bit unfair since I try to keep my opinion out of the discussions as much as possible, preferring to deal in facts. Also, I do own all the consoles except the Wii U), but just keep in mind that most of you are inherently 360 fanboys by the same definition. You live in a part of the world where the 360 is more popular, while I live in a part of the world where the PS3 is more popular. That kind of thing tends to influence people, and since I'm in the minority as a European here, my viewpoint in this matter will always end up being the odd one.

I have PS3 and 360,and i try and be down the middle(Screw Nintendo now,its all Microsoft and SONY for me),i know the PS3 has better Exclusive titles than the 360 or at least it has more,i guess its personal taste if you want to say they are better..and more games are now starting to have more exclusive content like Assassins Creed 3(AND 4 BTW),or even Medal of Honor having Frontlines with it,but their online is not as great(and you know my views on the controller,which is massively important for what machine you play games on IMO)

But other than the fact that it plays Blu-Rays and plays PS2 games(I have a Phatty...er..PS3 that is),i doubt i would turn it on that much if it didn't

(I am in two minds whether i am with Bull or not about B/C..on the one hand its one of the main reasons i turn on my PS3 to play PS2 games,and on the other hand,its not like i am scrambling to play PS3 games as it is at this moment now anyway,so why would i care if the PS4 plays PS3 games?)

Saying all that though i think the 360 sales are still outselling the PS3 sales here in the UK(But as you said TiLT its the other way around for the whole of Europe),so perhaps that has influenced me

Anyway,PS4..I hope SONY make me want to play games again on their machine the specs give me hope that some great looking and performing games can be achieved,while i am still a little dubious on the controller

I will be buying the NextBox and a PS4(launch day for both depending on price),I would very much rather love two consoles rather than just the one

BC has to be the most talked about aspect of a new console on forums that frankly will matter squat to its success in the long run.

If you want to keep playing your PS3 games after next year its really simple...don't get rid of your PS3.

Why do people keep tossing this out like it's a simple answer?

It's been mentioned many, many times that this is not the simple answer.

BC is an issue for me. A bigger issue for me is the way people continually boil the counter argument down to "It's not an issue for me, so it can't be an issue for you."

It may not matter much a few years into a console's lifespan, but it makes a big difference early on. If a parent is buying a console for a kid, for example, which one do you think will be more appealing: the one that only has a handful of full-priced games or the one that has a handful of full-priced games and a half decade worth of cheap games, some of which they already have?

I will have no issues replacing a console in my home. There are several issues with adding yet another one: The wife, the cables, available HDMI slots, the power outlets, the power consumption, the controllers, and the wife. Yes, she gets listed twice.

Yup,for some people with the B/C issue if it doesn't happen it may be to see how small and cheap the PS3 can become(if you remember the PS2 was tiny in the end),even with the latest models the PS3 is still quite chunky right now,i know i for one i am not too keen on having a PS3 and a PS4(although we don't know the size yet),a TiVO box and a 360 or Next Box next to my TV...we could be having this discussion all over again with the 360/Nextbox

again,though,it all depends on how much you need B/C or to play PS3 games when the PS4 is out,so of course i can imagine people having different opinions on this

I guess that you can stand these consoles up(at least the PS3 and 360 that we know of),helps some,....but i never like putting my consoles in those positions for some reason

QUESTION: can you still stand up the new models of the PS3?(as i said i have a Phat PS3)

Quote from: Bullwinkle on March 02, 2013, 04:12:54 PM

I will have no issues replacing a console in my home. There are several issues with adding yet another one: The wife, the cables, available HDMI slots, the power outlets, the power consumption, the controllers, and the wife. Yes, she gets listed twice.

Giant Enemy Crab refers to an enemy character in the PlayStation 3 videogame Genji: Days of the Blade first introduced through Sony’s press conference at E3 Expo in May 2006. During the presentation, Sony spokesperson was quoted as saying that the game plot was based on the actual history of Japan, just as a giant enemy crab character appeared onscreen in the demo footage.

BC has to be the most talked about aspect of a new console on forums that frankly will matter squat to its success in the long run.

If you want to keep playing your PS3 games after next year its really simple...don't get rid of your PS3.

Why do people keep tossing this out like it's a simple answer?

It's been mentioned many, many times that this is not the simple answer.

BC is an issue for me. A bigger issue for me is the way people continually boil the counter argument down to "It's not an issue for me, so it can't be an issue for you."

That's not at all what I'm saying. Show me the slightest evidence that having or not having BC helps or hurts al consoles overall success in the market. Whether its PlayStation, Xbox, or Wii. I say its a minor point at best when the console launches with there being a small number of games but within a year or so gets basically forgotten about by most. MS stopped doing its BC for the 360 after awhile and Sony took it out of the PS3. Its a feature checkmark box at best for the early part.

BC has to be the most talked about aspect of a new console on forums that frankly will matter squat to its success in the long run.

If you want to keep playing your PS3 games after next year its really simple...don't get rid of your PS3.

Why do people keep tossing this out like it's a simple answer?

It's been mentioned many, many times that this is not the simple answer.

BC is an issue for me. A bigger issue for me is the way people continually boil the counter argument down to "It's not an issue for me, so it can't be an issue for you."

That's not at all what I'm saying. Show me the slightest evidence that having or not having BC helps or hurts al consoles overall success in the market. Whether its PlayStation, Xbox, or Wii. I say its a minor point at best when the console launches with there being a small number of games but within a year or so gets basically forgotten about by most. MS stopped doing its BC for the 360 after awhile and Sony took it out of the PS3. Its a feature checkmark box at best for the early part.

And I have given you two cases where it's more significant than that in the part that you didn't quote, for some reason.

It may be a checkmark feature, but if that checkmark is not there, it counts as a strike against it in the beginning. I will grant that two years down the road, when the games are piling up, that it'll be less of an issue. But I'm sure Sony would rather have the sales now.

I'm not saying that everyone feels the same way or that all sales will be affected. However, some sales will be affected.

And when you say, "If you want to keep playing your PS3 games after next year its really simple...don't get rid of your PS3," you are, in fact, tossing that about like it's the simple answer, when it's not for some of us. Not you, but some of us.

Bull, the only thing I'm unclear on is if Sony's best case scenario would work for you. That is, if they have Gaikai streaming of PS3 games for every publisher that allows it, would you be satisfied? Obviously, the disk would still be required for disk based games. I'm afraid Tilt's right on hardware or emulation solutions.

For me, Microsoft turning their UI into ad central is far more annoying to me. I was quite content with my blades.

An interesting little bit of information that I stumbled upon in an interview today:

Apparently, the hardware specs that the PS4 developers have been working with were lower than what we were shown at the press conference. Developers were surprised at the increase, such as in CPU speed and amount of RAM. The tech demos we were shown were supposedly built for these lower specs.

Bull, the only thing I'm unclear on is if Sony's best case scenario would work for you. That is, if they have Gaikai streaming of PS3 games for every publisher that allows it, would you be satisfied? Obviously, the disk would still be required for disk based games. I'm afraid Tilt's right on hardware or emulation solutions.

For me, Microsoft turning their UI into ad central is far more annoying to me. I was quite content with my blades.

That would be perfectly fine, IF it allowed me to move my save games over so that I wouldn't lose my progress. I would even pay a fee to be able to play my PS3 games on the PS4, within reason.

An interesting little bit of information that I stumbled upon in an interview today:

Apparently, the hardware specs that the PS4 developers have been working with were lower than what we were shown at the press conference. Developers were surprised at the increase, such as in CPU speed and amount of RAM. The tech demos we were shown were supposedly built for these lower specs.

Yeah, I know people thought it was going to be a mess if Sony stuck with the 4GB and Microsoft went 8GB. I'm glad they made that last minute change, and I'm sure they will be happier in the long run despite it costing more upfront.

I knew about the RAM situation before the presentation and that Sony had told developers that they were trying to reach 8 GB before launch, but the CPU increase is new to me.

Most people in the know seem to agree that the Deep Down demo isn't prerendered too. It most likely doesn't represent actual gameplay, but the graphics are rendered in real time. If the CPU and RAM were increased after this demo was made, that bodes well for the console's future.

I will have no issues replacing a console in my home. There are several issues with adding yet another one: The wife, the cables, available HDMI slots, the power outlets, the power consumption, the controllers, and the wife. Yes, she gets listed twice.

I get the wife-that can be a major problem. But everything else, with the exception of maybe available HDMI slots? Come on. If extra cables are stopping you from playing your previous gen games then you obviously don't want to play them very badly. Just don't buy a PS4 for the first year and continue playing your PS3 games until you're done and then move on. The PS4 will have a decent library by then.

I will have no issues replacing a console in my home. There are several issues with adding yet another one: The wife, the cables, available HDMI slots, the power outlets, the power consumption, the controllers, and the wife. Yes, she gets listed twice.

I get the wife-that can be a major problem. But everything else, with the exception of maybe available HDMI slots? Come on. If extra cables are stopping you from playing your previous gen games then you obviously don't want to play them very badly. Just don't buy a PS4 for the first year and continue playing your PS3 games until you're done and then move on. The PS4 will have a decent library by then.

I have said that this is likely what I'll do.

First of all, available HDMI slots are a big one. You can buy a switcher, but that's a) another expense and 2) another piece of hardware. If you saw behind my TV, you wouldn't think the amount of cables weren't an issue. And the controllers are overtaking the house. More are just going to make it worse. There's also available space under the TV. There just isn't any for another big console.

where 360 at least had a year to establish itself, meant that PS3 was always behind in the race.

It did catch up eventually though. The PS3 lifetime sales are higher than the ones for the 360.

The PS3 lags behind the 360 globally, if you carve Japan off those numbers - their gaming culture is distinct in that, and MS has always struggled with that market (being an outsider - N and S are "local" and enjoy adoption rates just "cuz").

As for "exclusives" I'm having a hard time seeing benefit on either - most games I've enjoyed have been cross platform - save for Crackdown (1 over 2, 2's honeymoon period was less than 28 days) vs. inFamous (tie), Gears vs. generic shooter #3 (Killzone) (360), Halo vs. Resistance (360), Forza vs. Gran Turismo (360). Really, the only "big" games that went unanswered were LBP (never caught my attention - it always felt like trying too hard, and had no soul), Uncharted, Motorstorm (both meh for me- buyers remorse) and God of War.

I have God of War III still in shrink wrap - I'm about 3/4 of the way through GoW2 (HD) and got stuck. It has yet to compel me to continue.

I think for the most part, my gaming interests only need one console. While the BD player I have from SCEA has had some use, it hasn't been my go-to console and PC gaming then-360 has been how it's gone for me this gen.

I'd love to feel like I need both - but I'll be honest with you - my PS3 was gifted to me by a PM who wanted to reward me for my hard work on his project - and I don't think it's earned its keep in my house. I'm not a fanboy of either - and I'd gladly list two dozen things MS could do to correct their course on the next gen, but I'm not about to say that PS3 = 360.

For me, that symbol has been < . It affects my buying interest going forward, and having social integration is less than the promise of "illumiroom" and a fully realized Kinect. Having reviewed the worst Kinect game ever, I know its faults - and I also know how much they missed the boat on using it to its fullest advantage. I could also rant about how the "Metro" interface on the 360 is just about the worst way to use it - there is next to no customization, nor is it intuitive - the Windows Phone 8 interface is by far the best implementation and the Windows 8 running a second on it.

I'd put the blades third through seventeenth, windows 3.1, iOS and then XMB with the 360 "Metro" bringing up the rear.

Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson

where 360 at least had a year to establish itself, meant that PS3 was always behind in the race.

It did catch up eventually though. The PS3 lifetime sales are higher than the ones for the 360.

The PS3 lags behind the 360 globally, if you carve Japan off those numbers - their gaming culture is distinct in that, and MS has always struggled with that market (being an outsider - N and S are "local" and enjoy adoption rates just "cuz").

Why should we "carve Japan off those numbers"? We're talking about worldwide sales here. Whether or not you consider Japan to be a fair market for Microsoft is irrelevant.